Sentences with phrase «standards and accountability systems»

But currently, the focus on state standards and accountability systems is driving local decisions and policies in ways that are unprecedented.

Currently, the focus on state standards and accountability systems is driving local decisions and policies in ways that are unprecedented.

Superintendents acknowledge that federal and state standards and accountability systems have created a situation in which district and school personnel can not ignore evidence about students who are struggling or failing to meet mandated standards for academic performance, as reflected in test results and other indicators of student success (e.g., attendance, graduation rates).

There are a range of critical issues, such as: the implementation of the reauthorized ESEA (now called The Every Student Succeeds Act) which includes new flexibility for states in designing state standards and accountability systems as well as a hard cap on the number of students with the most significant cognitive disabilities taking alternate assessments on alternate standards; regulations on disproportionate identification of minority students to special education; and, the goal to transition more disadvantaged students into college and careers that will have a significant impact on some of the most vulnerable children.

The standards and accountability systems under which every public school in the nation operates in this century differ in many respects from earlier MCT systems.

In that spirit I'll offer a taxonomy that has helped me to think systematically about the ways that standards and accountability systems differ.

Under present day standards and accountability systems, states, pushed and prodded by the federal government, have moved from trying to force districts to educate students to a minimum level of basic skills and to do something about schools that are obviously failing, to holding districts, schools and teachers accountable for (in the words of the Common Core State Standards Initiative) «preparing all students for success in college, career, and life.»

They rail against state standards and accountability systems, but offer few practical alternatives for ensuring that all public schools perform at a high level.

But support for standards and accountability systems should not be equated with support for high - stakes tests.

Those states that have instituted reasonably tough standards and accountability systems have experienced real gains in achievement.

This includes how to design an optimal standards and accountability system.

Q: Has the state standards and accountability system (known as MCAS) helped or hindered your efforts?

Has the state standards and accountability system (known as MCAS) helped or hindered your efforts?

Not exact matches

New York's accountability system has evolved over the years by changes in standards, scoring and how tests are administered.

«The bottom line is that SUNY intends to create an insulated and self - regulated system, which would contradict and undermine state and national efforts to raise standards and accountability in teacher preparation and certification.»

While the Common Core standards emphasize development of reasoning and critical - thinking skills, the standards» perpetuation of a test - driven accountability system and teacher - directed learning environment compromises children's development of these higher - order skills.

In studying state accountability systems in 1999, the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation labeled 21 states «irresponsible,» possessing both weak accountability and either weak or no standards.

In choosing this year's «Better Balance,» for example, the editors signaled that something is awry in the existing balance between the «hard» elements of standards - based reform (namely the academic standards, assessments, and interventions that make up a state's accountability system) and such «soft» components as teacher training, instructional materials, and classroom environment.

After years of stagnation in the late 1980s and early 1990s, achievement began to rise again in the late «90s — particularly in the earlier grades and most notably in math — as states set new academic standards, started testing their students regularly, and installed their own versions of «consequential accountability» systems.

Instead of devoting so much energy to dismissing the standards movement, small - schools founders and advocates would do well to engage the discussion and help refine or redefine state standards and statewide accountability systems in the name of equity.

The No Child Left Behind accountability system designed to accommodate variation in state standards and assessments was problematic.

Julian said: «Having worked at the centre of government, I know that the architects of England's school accountability system are motivated by the best of intentions: to expose serious under - performance and raise standards.

Standards and Accountability: The foundation of any school accountability system rests on solid academic standards, and assessments aligned with thAccountability: The foundation of any school accountability system rests on solid academic standards, and assessments aligned with thaccountability system rests on solid academic standards, and assessments aligned with those standards.

These are the schools that standards, standardized assessments, and state accountability systems are designed to identify and fix.

For one thing, in getting a waiver from the federal No Child Left Behind Act, Indiana (like other states) promised the Obama administration it would adopt standards that met federal criteria; align curricula and teaching; select, pilot, and administer new tests aligned to the standards; and integrate the standards into both school - and teacher - accountability systems.

Rather, it is a way for policymakers to challenge the «givens» of the existing system by harnessing the powerful dynamics created by choice, competition, standards, and accountability.

For some context, when No Child Left Behind required every state to adopt standards, create assessments aligned to those assessments, and build an accountability and reporting system, it gave states 44 months to do all of those things (from January 2002 to September 2005).

Texas Gov. Rick Perry has signed legislation that will make some significant changes in the state's accountability system and budgeting requirements for schools, including tougher high school graduation standards and elimination of a requirement that school districts must spend 65 percent of their operating budgets on classroom instruction.

Chief among these were common standards and the assessments to go with them, and increased teacher accountability through new evaluation systems that included student test scores.

If states continue to implement the standards in ways that undermine systems working to improve education in their state (like teacher evaluation, school accountability, school choice, etc.) more and more states will feel the pressure to abandon the standards.

It doesn't erase the need for rigorous standards, tough accountability, vastly improved data systems, better teacher evaluations (and training, etc.), stronger school leaders, the right of families to choose schools, and much else that reformers have been struggling to bring about.

That model, I think, is now well known across the state: standards - based curriculum, radically better assessments,... a fair but rigorous accountability system which, as you know, the Regents will soon put into regulations creating the framework of evaluation for principals and teachers.

Regardless of the reform strategy — whether new standards, or accountability, or small schools, or parental choice, or teacher effectiveness — there is an underlying weakness in the U.S. education system which has hampered every effort up to now: most consequential decisions are made by district and state leaders, yet these leaders lack the infrastructure to learn quickly what's working and what's not.

The heart of an accountability system lies not in the words of standards documents but in the tests and other assessments that are used to determine whether the standards have been met.

All these lawsuits are riding high on the back of the standards and accountability movement - even though Michael Cohen in «Unruly Crew «shows that states have been slow to implement their accountability systems.

To date, we can count a multitude of policy wins — better data, stronger accountability systems, and a move toward more rigorous academic standards — along with a universal acceptance that we must aim to close gaps in achievement and opportunity.

Within the evolving standards and accountability movement, states (rather than the nation or school districts) have borne the responsibility to develop standards, tests linked to those standards, and a system of rewards and punishments for schools depending on their performance.

The courts» role in this process is to outline in general, principled terms the expectation that the legislative and executive branches will develop challenging standards, fair and adequate funding systems, and effective programs and accountability measures, but to leave to the programs and the political branches the full responsibility for actually formulating these policies.

But the report, based on a survey of states, indicates that states have been slower to embrace assessments, high school graduation requirements, and, most especially, «comprehensive» accountability systems to match the standards.

A new study of Massachusetts teachers from researchers at the Harvard Graduate School of Education showed that even in a state with a highly developed system of standards and accountability, new teachers were not provided with the curricula they needed to teach to standards.

«We are committed to establishing a worldwide educational system by simultaneously raising the standards of learning, affording greater autonomy at the local school level, and creating increased accountability for student success,» said Lillian Gonzalez, the director of the Department of Defense Education Activity,...

First, misaligned assessments undermine the critical link between what is reported in accountability systems (test - score and teacher - evaluation data) and what districts purport to value (Common Core — aligned instruction, student success with the new standards).

Almost all now have standards for what students should know in core subjects, tests to measure student learning, and at least the beginnings of an accountability system to hold schools responsible for results.»

ED's press release explains, «The administration's proposal for fixing NCLB calls for college and career - ready standards, more great teachers and principals, robust use of data and a more flexible and targeted accountability system based on measuring annual student growth.

Standards and Accountability: Utah is off to a good start in building a standards - based system, but there's room for growth.

Seen through this lens, we can understand why the standard accountability system looks and acts the way it does: They are statewide, uniform accountability systems that apply identically to all schools.

As American education reformers try again, under the Common Core State Standards, to create a sensible system of standards, assessments, and accountability, what can we learn from our earlier mistakes?

This is evident in the federal law's requirement that each state's accountability system generate a report card for each school and district indicating the proportion of students meeting proficiency standards on state tests of math and reading.

Meanwhile, two - thirds of CPS schools failed to meet state proficiency standards under Illinois's accountability system, and Chicago remained among the nation's lowest - performing urban districts on the National Assessment of Educational Progress.

The states that made the most progress after allowing for other factors — Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Kentucky, and Georgia, to name the top five — have taken steps, in various ways, to raise academic standards and back them up with rigorous assessments, implement tough but thoughtful accountability systems, and strengthen human capital practices to attract, develop, and retain educators who can deliver on high standards.